Google Challenges Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Findings in High Court

Google has been subject to scrutiny over its search results in the US, France, Belgium and the EU – however, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is the first regulatory body to seek legal clarification around Google’s conduct from a trade practices perspective.

FEDERAL COURT – FIRST JUDGEMENT

The ACCC commenced proceedings against Google in November 2007 alleging that by failing to adequately distinguish advertisements from search results, Google had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct. The ACCC based its case on the contention that the overall layout and appearance of the results page failed to sufficiently distinguish between organic search results and advertisements.
The Federal Court found that the use of the word “advertisement” or an abbreviation of that word, rather than “sponsored links”, might eliminate or reduce confusion in the minds of some users, however, Google’s presentation of search results did not breach consumer laws. Since the ACCC began the proceedings, Google has changed the description of its search results advertisements from “Sponsored Links” to “Ads”.

FULL FEDERAL COURT – THE APPEAL BY THE ACCC

On 3 April 2012, the ACCC appealed the first decision and the Full Federal Court overturned it. The Court upheld the appeal on the basis that Google search results were a response to a Google search query by a user, which represented that the content of the “sponsored link” was responsive to the user’s query. In essence, the Court found that it was actually Google itself providing a response to a search enquiry, rather than being an objective ‘mere conduit’ for search results.

HIGH COURT – GOOGLE’S APPEAL

On 25 June 2012, Google was granted special leave by the High Court of Australia to appeal the decision of the Full Federal Court, and the appeal will be heard over the next few months. In other jurisdictions (including the US), courts have assumed that Internet users understand that “sponsored links” are advertising tools – this may have an impact on the High Court’s decision.
Whatever the outcome, the decision promises to be an illuminating one in respect of the online advertising space. Any Australian Internet based business integrating advertisements with content should pay particular attention to this case.

Schedule a free 15 minute Litigation call

Client Reviews

"The team at Rouse Lawyers has been fantastic."

The team at Rouse Lawyers has been fantastic. As a new technology startup, we had some unique requirements around licensing and partner agreements, trademarking as well as off-shore contractor agreements. Matthew and Patrick have been great to deal with – not only from an advice perspective but also delivering these agreements in a timely manner. Dealing with Rouse Lawyers has allowed us to concentrate on our business knowing the legal side is in good hands.

Gareth Beachy-HeadHub3c

"Smooth, affordable and manageable"

“We recently engaged Rouse Lawyers to assist us in purchasing our first home. The support we received from Jesse Mason and his team was invaluable, easing the overwhelming emotions of being first time homebuyers. He supported us to understand both the land and home contracts, walking us through the process and promptly responding to any concerns, which made the whole process smooth, affordable and manageable”.

Nick JohnstonHitachi Construction Machinery (Australia) Pty Ltd

"We consider Rouse part of our team, and highly recommend them"

“Given the nature and size of our clients, we are constantly dealing with the big end of town when it comes to law firms. Matthew’s strategic advice has been utilised in negotiating software development agreements for our 3D interactive rendering engine, structuring our IP, employment matters, recoveries and corporate advice. We consider Rouse part of our team, and highly recommend them as a commercial law firm.”